Abstract
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF) in photorefractive keratectomy (PRK) versus Mitomycin C (MMC).This is a comparative, longitudinal and retrospective case-control study (MMC vs PRGF), in patients with a spherical correction from −0.25 to −8.00 D and cylinder correction from −0.25 to −3.00. The uncorrected distance visual acuity (UDVA), refractive efficacy and safety indices, and changes in endothelial cell density were evaluated. The predictability was assessed with the postoperative manifest spherical equivalent.Forty-four patients (72 eyes) were treated with MMC and twenty-five patients (45 eyes) with PRGF. The final UDVA (LogMar) in MMC was 0.029 ± 0.065 and in PRGF it was 0.028 ± 0.048 (p = 0.383). The efficacy index for MMC was 0.98 ± 0.10 and 1.10 ± 0.46 for patients treated with PRGF (p = 0.062). The safety index for MMC was 1.03 ± 0.11 and 1.12 ± 0.46 (p = 0.158) for PRGF group. The change percentage of endothelial cell density was 0.9 ± 11.6 for MMC and 4.3 ± 13.1 for PRGF (p = 0.593). The predictability for MMC was 92.1% and for the PRGF was 91.9% (p = 0.976). Hyperemia, eye pain and superficial keratitis were observed in 11.1% of the MMC group; no adverse events were observed with the PRGF.The use of PRGF in PRK surgery is as effective as MMC. The PRGF shows a better safety profile than MMC for its intraoperative use in PRK.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
